User talk:Mobiluri

Bank of Georgia
Hi - Please read WP:SOURCE before editing wikipedia. The material you inserted was neither wikified (i.e. the links were missing) nor independently sourced. Also if you are an employee of the company you have a conflict of interest per WP:COI and should not be editing the article. To help, I have now added the key milestones in the development of the bank with links and references. I hope you like it. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 20:41, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi. I completely understand rules you are referring to, but I am afraid it is still unclear to me why my version of the article was completely removed/reverted. The whole text was written with good faith, its neutral and has nothing biased. If you feel that some part of it needs links, please, highlight it and either I will prove it or correct it. If we dive into details of last version, I completely don't understand purpose of adding insurance companies' own market steps to the Bank's article. Also, you are referring to Bank's official website as a source 4 times but published the note that contributor has a close connection with a subject. I think this article needs complete rework that I plan to do in the following days. If you will have some time, your help and contribution will be more that appreciated. Thanks. Mobiluri (talk) 17:53, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * The key point is that wikipedia is independent and its content should be independently sourced and should really include criticisms of the company as well as its achievements. The text you inserted was not sourced and presumably came entirely from company sources. I spent a couple of hours adding material that I thought you would appreciate so I am disappointed at your response. I also note that you intend to rework the article despite the fact that this would be in breach of wikipedia's guideline on conflicts of interest. I am surprised that Bank of Georgia takes such a cavalier attitude to conflicts of interest and compliance issues. Please note that persistent breach of wikipedia guidelines could lead to you being blocked from editing wikipedia. It could also lead to reputational damage to the Bank (please see this article). But you were right about inappropriate use of the Bank's official website as a source four times and I think I have sorted this as far as possible - thanks. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 20:21, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi. I respect any contribution and had no intention to somehow disappoint you. At the same time, it seemed unfair to me that you respect your 2 hours but completely removed my far bigger contribution without giving it a try to use somehow or to ask/find prooflinks for the text. Also, please note, that the Bank is not involved in this contribution - it is my personal knowledge of Georgian banking system, where I have spent more than 10 years of working. My personal intention is to avoid 5 sentence articles here if I can contribute more based on my experience. But well, if everything said by me will be blocked/removed/rolled back just because I am assumed here as an employee of the company - well, I will not do so and let this article be as poor as it was for a years before. I hope other contributors will find the way to enrich this article. Thanks for your advice.Mobiluri (talk) 05:10, 26 August 2013 (UTC)


 * When I assumed you were an employee of the company I was merely going on the basis of you comment "I represent Bank of Georgia and all the data and links for this version are verified by the company." As regards your own much longer text the main difficulty with it was that it was not wikified and the individual facts did not have in-line independent references. This takes time and effort even for quite a short piece of text. That said if you are not an employee of the company I have no difficulty to you adding further independently sourced information just as long as you insert the wikilinks and in-line references. Why don't you try a sentence at a time as I do? Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 09:53, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

That "edit summary" comment was full of mistakes that changed the whole meaning of the sentence... Unfortunately I can't correct it now, can I?Mobiluri (talk) 10:09, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * No, you can't but no problem. Dormskirk (talk) 11:42, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi. I added photo of current headquarters. Is it fine? Thanks.Mobiluri (talk) 21:22, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It looks good. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 21:30, 27 August 2013 (UTC)